I am working on an ASP.NET MVC based CMS that presents a rather extreme case. The system must allow the user to add custom content types based on different fields, and for every field, one can add options and validations. The thing is that everything is stored in a complex DB and extracted at runtime using LINQ.
I am pretty fresh with ASP>NET MVC so the following dilemma came to mind
How should I make the content creation view so that form helpers are not predefined int he view code but are loaded based on the type of the field ? Do I have to create a factory class that checks the value of the type property of the field, and then returns a helper based on that or there's a better way to do it. This one seems pretty rigid to me , because anytime I make a change in the Fieldtypes table, I will have to make sure to create a check for that new type too.
public class CType {
string Name; //e.g Post Article etc
List<ContentData> data ;
...
}
public class ContentData {
string Data; // Basically this is the data stored for each field
FieldInstance fieldInstance;
...
}
public class FieldInstance {
string Title; // e.g Title Body etc.
FieldType Type ; // e.g textbox textarea image checkbox etc
...
}
public class FieldType {
string Type; // e.g textbox textarea image checkbox etc
...
}
I see an HTML Helper in your future. The HTML Helper can work through your Model at runtime and output the appropriate HTML for the View. If you go that route, I suggest you get to know the StringBuilder and TagBuilder classes. They'll simplify things and help make your HTML Helper much more readable.
I did not know about the concept of templated helpers. This is what happens when you're new to something. Pretty much, this is what fixed my problem
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ee308450%28VS.100,printer%29.aspx
Related
I'm in the process of refitting a website that I'd previously built using ASP.net with VB in the code-behind, into MVC with VB so that it's more responsive to different screen sizes and device types.
So far I've been able to replicate six of the pages plus the Site.Master files. Now I'm turning my attention to the Contact page which in asp.net takes data from a form, validates it for completion and data-type compliance and then passes it to the code-behind which uses it to generate an email.
I've done quite a lot of reading which suggests using a Model but all the examples I've found then use that Model to populate or query a database using LINQ.
How can I do this without a database?
The M in MVC stands for Model, not Mdatabase. You can use whatever you want as the model. Most applications use a database and most .NET applications use EF to access a database (or at least Microsoft want it that way) but you can use whatever you want.
Using a database engine is recommended as permanent storage, but essentially you can create model class for contact page without involving a database like this:
public class Contact
{
[Required]
public String Name { get; set; }
[Required]
public String EmailAddress { get; set; }
}
And you can use LINQ/lambda expressions after wrapping your model class into a collection (e.g. List), as example:
var list = new List<Contact>();
list.Add(new Contact { ... }); // adding items to the list
// Lambda syntax
var name = list.Select(x => x.Name); // returns a value from the list
// LINQ syntax
var email = (from item in list
select item.EmailAddress);
Then you can convert the code-behind logic to a controller action method as ActionResult each for GET and POST request. Afterwards, Redirect, RedirectToAction or simply return View() after data submission can be used for page handling.
About responsive page design to work with different screen sizes and device types, MVC itself not designed to present responsive layouts by default. You need to alter some HTML & CSS-related attributes, as similar problem here:
How to make an MVC web application adjust to automatically fit different screen sizes
NB: Since your problem doesn't include any code, the provided codes are just examples as figure to what should be done.
When you generate grails views, grails looks at your relationships and generates the right html for your form data to be automatically binded to the back end domain. For one to one associations grails creates a drop down list.
However, you might not want to present that property as a drop down list but something more custom (for example a text field with autocomplete). As soon as you do that the value that comes to the controller from that field, comes in as a String and you have to first:
Clear errors
Perform a findBy based on a given param and assign it to the property of the domain
I really want to avoid doing findBys in the controller as much as possible because it seems like I am doing logic/things that should not go there. The controller should delegate to the Service layer. It is not clear to me from the grails documentation how would I do that by using bindData which seems to work really well with String, date, Integer properties etc.. but I do not see how bindData is used for properties that are other domains.
I also really want to avoid passing the params object to the Service layer as it seems less reusable (or maybe not, correct me if I am wrong). I guess that I do not like how it looks semantically. I would prefer the first over the second:
#Transactional
class WithdrawService {
def addWithdraw(Withdraw withdraw) {
//perform business logic here
}
def createWithdraw(Map params){
//perform business logic here
}
}
Let's take the following example:
class Withdraw {
Person person
Date withdrawDate
}
and the parent lookup table
class Person {
String name
String lastName
static constraints = {
}
#Override
public String toString() {
return "$name $lastName"
}
}
In order for the bind to happen automatically without any extra work grails passes in the following request params to automatically bind the one to one:
person.id
a person map with the id.
[person.id:2, person:[id:2], withdrawDate:date.struct, withdrawDate_month:11, create:Create, withdrawDate_year:2015, withdrawDate_day:10, action:save, format:null, controller:withdraw]
What is the best way to go about this?
Pass two hidden fields that look exactly like this: person.id:2, person:[id:2] that get populated as a result of the Ajax call that populates the autocomplete?
In the controller do a Person.findBySomeKnownProperty(params.someKnownValue)
Or any other approach?
Here's my situation: I've got a number of specialized object types in my application, and I'm following the standard convention for displaying them with custom templates in the /Shared/DisplayTemplates folder, and editing them with templates in /Shared/EditorTemplates. But I also want to be able to display a custom filter template for each type, so I'd like to add a /Shared/FilterTemplates folder, and implement my own #Html.FilterFor method, so that showing a Filter template is exactly like showing a Display or Editor template.
Does this seem like the best way to handle this situation, or is there a more correct/elegant way to do this in MVC? Thanks in advance.
I'm always using EditorTemplates when data is sent back to server. I assume the user can submit the filter to the server to perform the actual filtering.
When creating filters I prefer to create a model for the filter like:
public class UserListFilterModel
{
public string Username { get; set; }
public bool IsEnabled { get; set; }
}
The view for UserListFilterModel goes into EditorTemplates/UserListFilterModel.ascx.
And then add it as a property on my view model for the page.
public class MyPageViewModel
{
public UserListFilterModel Filter { get; set; }
}
Then I add the filter model to the model for the page and displays it like this:
<%= Html.EditorFor(x => x.Filter)%>
You are probably wrapping the filter in a form to allow the user to submit the values so I think it belongs in EditorTemplates. The users is in fact editing the filter model.
(If you really want to separate them ing you could use the UIHintAttribute but I wouldn't)
Edit: I added some sample code.
I think you misunderstand how Templates work. Templates do not make sense in the context you are describing.
Templates work on a SINGLE data item (although that data item can contain multiple data items, which in turn have their own templates).
The concept of a Filter is to control multiple data items, thus they do not map well to a template.
What you could do is create a DisplayTemplate for your collection class that adds filtering, thus no need to create a custom type of template. Just use DisplayTemplates.
I'm working on an ASP.NET MVC project that will allow users to perform batch edits on the attributes of objects. The implementation is in a sort of "wizard" like form with four phases to the process as follows:
"Select the attributes you want to edit" - the first page will present the user with a list of checkboxes representing each of the attributes they want to edit. The user should check the attributes they wish to edit and select "Continue".
"Edit the selected attributes" - the second page will present the user with a list of distinct "editors" which will be unique for each of the attributes they selected on the first page.
"Review your changes" - this page will allow the user to review the changes they've made to the attributes they selected.
"Submit your changes" - this page will actually submit the information about the edits the user wishes to make to the selected attributes against the selected collection of objects.
Fairly straight-forward.
As I mentioned, the "editor" will be unique to each attribute, and could have any combination of different controls on it. Once a user has made their edits and the application posts that information to the "Review" page is where I'm currently having my problem.
We've developed the concept of an "EditorWorker" class that is unique to each attribute, which is responsible for generating the ViewModel necessary for each editor, but is also responsible for creating/returning (within the "Review" page controller action) an object that is the "model" object for the editor that the post data can be bound to, which can then be use to display the edited data for review. This object should have properties that match up with the IDs of the controls in the editor so that model binding can occur.
I've got the "EditorWorker" creating and returning the class needed, but for some reason, when I call TryUpdateModel and pass in that class, its properties aren't getting populated as a result of that method call as I would expect them to. I have verified that the values are in the posted FormCollection. Below is the code for my controller action where I'm attempting to do this. If someone can help me understand why TryUpdateModel isn't working in this scenario, I would be very appreciative.
[HttpPost]
public virtual ActionResult Review(ReviewBatchViewModel model)
{
var selectedAttributes = GetSelectedAttributes(model.SelectedAttributeIds.Split(',').Select(i => Int64.Parse(i)).ToArray());
var workers = new List<IEditorWorker>();
var reviewData = new Dictionary<ViewAttribute, IEditData>();
foreach (var attribute in selectedAttributes)
{
if (!string.IsNullOrEmpty(attribute.EditorWorker)) // If there is no EditorWorker defined for this object, move on...
{
var worker = ServiceLocator.Current.GetInstance(Type.GetType(string.Format("{0}.{1}", EditorWorkerNamespace, attribute.EditorWorker)));
var attributeEditData = ((IEditorWorker)worker).LoadEditData();
if (TryUpdateModel(attributeEditData))
model.EditData.Add(attributeEditData); // model.EditData is a List<IEditData> that will be iterated on the Review page
reviewData.Add(attribute, attributeEditData);
}
}
return View(model);
}
// ReviewBatchViewModel.cs
public class ReviewBatchViewModel : BaseViewModel
{
public ReviewBatchViewModel() { EditData = new List<IEditData>(); }
public string SelectedAttributeIds { get; set; }
public List<ViewAttribute> SelectedAttributes { get; set; }
public List<IEditData> EditData { get; set; }
}
// IEditData.cs
public interface IEditData
{
}
// BroadcastStatusEditData.cs
public class BroadcastStatusEditData : IEditData
{
public int BroadcastStatus { get; set; }
}
I totally understand that this controller action is incomplete in its current state. I'm presently working on just trying to get those EditData objects populated correctly before I move on. As mentioned, any thoughts would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.
UPDATE: With regards to #mare's comment, I should have explained that part more clearly, sorry. The call to TryUpdateModel actually is returning true, but the fields on the model object being passed into it aren't actually being populated from the values that have been confirmed present in the posted form data. The model object being passed into the call is not a List, its just a poco. The resulting, ultimately hopefully populated model object is then being added to a List collection of model objects that will then be used for displaying the posted data for review on the Review page. I'm not loading anything from a datastore at all. Unique editors for each selected attribute are being rendered to the Edit screen, and I'm attempting to capture the edit values for display on a Review screen prior to submitting the batch of edits to a service. Hopefully that's more clear. Thanks.
UPDATE 2: I've included the definition of the ReviewBatchViewModel class as requested by #mare in the comments. The use of the var keyword in most cases in this code sample is largely due to the fact that the methods that are populating those variables is going to be returning an object of a different type for each attribute selected, so I never know exactly what its going to be at runtime (although it will always implement an interface, in this case either IEditorWorker and/or IEditData). There is a single class in the Model called "Attribute". The provided code sample has three variables relative that class: 1) SelectedAttributeIds is a comma-separated list of the Id's of the attributes that the user has selected to edit, which gets passed from the Edit page to the Review page via hidden field, 2) selectedAttributes is a collection of the actual Attribute objects that correspond to those Ids that I can work with, and 3) attributeEditData is an instance of the IEditData class specific to each given attribute that I'm attempting to bind the posted data from the Edit page to.
Hopefully this additional information clears things up even more.
TryUpdateModel is a generic method, and therefore attempts to infer all type information based on the Generic Type Parameter.
From what I understand in your example above, you are always passing in a IEditData correct?
In effect you are saying:
TryUpdateModel<IEditData>(attributeEditData)
This is most likely the cause for not seeing any properties being set, since IEditData doesn't have any properties ;)
To do what you want you will probably have to create a custom ModelBinder.
As a quick code review side note, your solution seems overly complicated. I had to stare at your solution for a good while just to figure out where to start. Creating a custom model binder may solve your immediate problem, but you might be looking at a big time maintenance headache here. I'm willing to bet there is a simpler approach that will lead to fewer problems down the road.
Based on your comments I have changed the code around from System.Object to your IEditData interface, but everything still holds. I noticed in an earlier comment you mentioned using var because you didn't know the type until runtime. However, there is nothing magic about the var keyword. The only thing it does is give you implicit typing, but it is still statically typed.
The nice thing about MVC is that you can just pop over to Codeplex and have a look at the source for TryUpdateModel if you want. Digging down a few layers you will eventually find a call to this internal method:
protected internal bool TryUpdateModel<TModel>(TModel model, string prefix, string[] includeProperties, string[] excludeProperties, IDictionary<string, ValueProviderResult> valueProvider) where TModel : class {
if (model == null) {
throw new ArgumentNullException("model");
}
//valueProvider is passed into this internal method by
// referencing the public ControlerBase.ValueProvider property
if (valueProvider == null) {
throw new ArgumentNullException("valueProvider");
}
Predicate<string> propertyFilter = propertyName => BindAttribute.IsPropertyAllowed(propertyName, includeProperties, excludeProperties);
//Binders is an internal property that can be replaced by
// referencing the static class ModelBinders.Binders
IModelBinder binder = Binders.GetBinder(typeof(TModel));
ModelBindingContext bindingContext = new ModelBindingContext() {
Model = model,
ModelName = prefix,
ModelState = ModelState,
ModelType = typeof(TModel),
PropertyFilter = propertyFilter,
ValueProvider = valueProvider
};
binder.BindModel(ControllerContext, bindingContext);
return ModelState.IsValid;
}
Notice the use of typeof(TModel) everywhere... in your case that is getting translated into typeof(IEditData), which isn't very useful since it is only a marker interface. You should be able to adapt this code for your own use, making sure to use GetType() in order to get the actual type at runtime.
I hope this helps out!
P.S. I've added some comments to the above code to help out a little
#Josh, you were very helpful in helping me understand why TryUpdateModel wasn't working for me, and I appreciate that. Unfortunately, I think the larger issue here was that fact that I (not exactly sure which) was either unable or unwilling to try to document all of the details of the requirements for the problem I'm trying to solve here, which I think made it difficult for anyone to be able to provide much meaningful input. The biggest problem for us is that, because we have no idea until runtime which attributes a user has selected for editing, we don't know which objects we'll be working with in the context of these controller actions, or what their types will be. The one place that we safely can work with known data and types, is within the context of each of the unique EditorWorker objects, which is where I've chosen to do the heavy lifting here.
I was hoping and attempting to take advantage of all of the heavy lifting that MSFT has done for us within the MVC framework to handle model binding, but I've come to the conclusion at this point that I don't think that's going to work for us. The solution that I've come up with at this point, is to allow the LoadEditData method of the EditorWorker classes handle loading up the EditData classes for for me. As each EditorWorker class is unique to, and has knowledge of the attribute that it is associated with. The problem I was having originally was that I was letting the EditorWorker.LoadEditData method just return an empty instance of the specific type of EditData class that I needed for the attribute I was currently working with, and let the MVC framework handle model binding to that object for me. That wasn't working because that method is designed to return an object of type IEditData, and I never really knew exactly what type it was that I was currently working with, so I had no way of specifying the type in the call to either of the typed methods: TryUpdateModel<T> or UpdateModel<T>.
So the solution I've come up with, and am going with at least for now (re-education and/or refactoring may very well change this in the future, who knows) is to just pass the Request.Form object into the call to EditorWorker.LoadEditData and let that method handle actually loading up the EditData object that it knows it needs to return for the attribute it's responsible for, which it can do as it knows what information should be in the posted form collection to load up its EditData object.
So that's where I'm at for now. Thanks for the help.
This question title is likely to be worded poorly so feel free to adjust.
In my MVC application I have a custom attribute which i use to decorate email fields which then either passes or fails the model.
On one pge though I allow the use to submit a comment but I submit via ajax and so do not do a full postback and no model validation.
So I'd like to validate the address but not copy the code. I'd also like to avoid breaking the code out of the validator into yet another class or is this the best wAY?
Is there another way? Can I create the model in the ajax postback and validate it there and then return the partial view with the error messages?
Or is there another way?
You say, ...
So I'd like to validate the address but not copy the code. I'd also like to avoid breaking the code out of the validator into yet another class or is this the best way?
IMO, that is the best way. Factor out the common code. I see your issue though, our EmailValidator inherits from RegularExpressionValidator, so it's hard to factor out. We have a RegEx utility class that uses the same RegEx pattern. We refer to the pattern by constant in both places...
public class EmailAttribute : RegularExpressionAttribute
{
public EmailAttribute() :
base(RegExUtility.SingleEmailAddressPattern)
{
ErrorMessage = "Please enter a valid email address";
}
and
public static class RegExUtility
{
public const SingleEmailAddressPattern = #"...";
public static bool IsValidSingleEmailAddress(string email)
{
return Regex.IsMatch(email, SingleEmailAddressPattern);
For simple Ajax postback actions, I think you can often handle it in the controller or create a separate POCO ViewModel that just supports the Ajax path. I know there are articles on using the same model for both types of actions, but we've found there are usually enough differences that it's worth having separate view models. If they're complex enough, we just factor out the common code.